0
   

What is the meaning of the concept 'mind' in the 'Phenomenology of Mind'?

 
 
Reply Mon 21 Jun, 2010 04:23 pm
Although I know that the usual translation should be 'spirit', I want to ask others
about it, and also with respect to the meaning of 'mind' in Collingwood's philosophy when he says that the subject-matter of history is mind. Please could give some details for I am writing an essay an English philosophical language, and if someone could help me in giving me references on this concept's history in English philosophical language.
 
electronicmail
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Jun, 2010 05:00 pm
@wotanstod,
Well I don't know if that helps or how old you are but given your name you'll recognize the musical score here at least http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx7XNb3Q9Ek&feature=related I've no idea if that's what Hegel was thinking and in fact I doubt it, not that I've read his 200 volumes or anything. But if you listen carefully to the dialog in the entire link you'll notice that "270" (coming out of the east) involves the mind and that "shall we dance" can only involve a spirit: only spirits can dance. I don't know how that would translate into German but when you're done with your essay I'd be interested in reading it.
0 Replies
 
de Silentio
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Jun, 2010 06:06 pm
@wotanstod,
I'm not trying to be a smart ass, but Google is my best friend while writing philosophy papers. Here is the search I did:

http://www.google.com/search?q=phenomenology+of+mind&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=&oe=

If you are a colleged student, you college probably gives you access to scholarly journals that you typically find on Google (Going through Google points you directly to the site, and you probably don't have a login, so you have to go through you universities site (usually the library site)).

That doesn't answer your question, but it might help.
electronicmail
 
  0  
Reply Mon 21 Jun, 2010 07:10 pm
@de Silentio,
Quote:
If you are a colleged student, you college probably gives you access to scholarly journals that you typically find on Google (Going through Google points you directly to the site, and you probably don't have a login, so you have to go through you universities site (usually the library site)).

You claim to be a web developer. You can't read, write, view a video link, or even listen to music. What web is it you work on and how does it help the poster's question?
electronicmail
 
  0  
Reply Mon 21 Jun, 2010 07:21 pm
@de Silentio,
Quote:
de omnibus dubitandum est
Well at least your signature line gives fair warning about the quality of your advice. Maybe you can add "caveat emptor", Hegel whether mind or spirit was an honest man and would be sure to have done just that Laughing Laughing
0 Replies
 
de Silentio
 
  3  
Reply Mon 21 Jun, 2010 09:37 pm
@electronicmail,
electronicmail wrote:

You claim to be a web developer. You can't read, write, view a video link, or even listen to music. What web is it you work on and how does it help the poster's question?


I'm sorry, but your post does not make sense to me. What gives you justification to say that I cannot "read, write, view a video link or, even listen to music"?

I made some spelling/grammatical mistakes and you attack them? Really? As a representitive of the "able2know" community I thouhgt you would be a little more thoughtful and considerate in your repsonse.

Perhaps you can help me understand what you mean by this:

"What web is it you work on and how does it help the poster's question?"

I didn't say word one about my work as a "web developer" in this post. I don't see how you mentioning my professional background is relevent to my comment or your views on my comment. Furthermore, it makes no sense to say that I think my web development background can help the poster.

Maybe out of respect you should review my post again and speak to the actual content that I was presenting instead of the petty grammitical errors. If you need me to spell out the content for you, just ask.

Smile (Or maybe I'm the jackass?)
electronicmail
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Jun, 2010 01:02 am
@de Silentio,
Quote:
Or maybe I'm the jackass?
I don't know if you are or not or why there has to be one. I don't think I'm representative of this community either. Let's start over, do you have an answer to the question here?
roger
 
  2  
Reply Tue 22 Jun, 2010 01:07 am
@de Silentio,
de Silentio wrote:


I made some spelling/grammatical mistakes and you attack them? Really? As a representitive of the "able2know" community I thouhgt you would be a little more thoughtful and considerate in your repsonse.



I would have thought so, too. We are usually more involved with the meanings, so long as they aren't obscured by typographical things and grammar.

Unless you are criticising someone else's errors, of course. Then, we can be merciless.
0 Replies
 
de Silentio
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Jun, 2010 06:38 am
@electronicmail,
electronicmail wrote:
I don't know if you are or not or why there has to be one. I don't think I'm representative of this community either. Let's start over, do you have an answer to the question here?


Unfortunately, eloctronicmail, as a constituent member of this community, you are a representative of this community.

I don't have a direct answer, as I have not researched the particular subject. I started to answer the question with what I know abou Husserl's Phenomenology, then thought better of it because I might just confuse matters all the more. The best help I could give was to provide the means by which I do research. Perhaps something about giving fishes and teaching to fish applies here, perhaps not. I left that up to the original poster to decide.

So I don't derail this topic any further, please refer to this post about my signature: http://able2know.org/topic/153404-1

Thanks.

0 Replies
 
jgweed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Jun, 2010 11:22 am
@wotanstod,
As you are probably aware, philosophers spend a great deal of time and effort defining terms in a very precise and often in a way unique to each thinker. It is, consequently, not a simple task to discuss what Hegel meant by "mind" or "spirit" or to quickly discuss Collingwood's restatement (especially without a direct reference to his discussion). Neither question has a simple answer.

Perhaps if you could, moreover, provide more information about what your essay is attempting to do, someone could frame an answer that would be helpful. I take it that your essay somehow wants to follow the Hegelian concept as it was seen and used by later philosophers, and perhaps draw some conclusion about philosophical terminology from that example.
thack45
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Jun, 2010 04:42 pm
@jgweed,
jgweed wrote:

As you are probably aware, philosophers spend a great deal of time and effort defining terms in a very precise and often in a way unique to each thinker.
(Sorry for going off topic for a moment...) Even though I am merely in the most minute sense anything like a philosopher (sadly), I do this a lot*, much as it irritates my peers. One that troubles me is a lack of distinction between happiness and contentment. I legitamately fell bad for those who don't consider the diferences...

*I previewed and edited this comment seven or eight times (okay, now it's ten or so) and I'm still not satisfied. Embarrassed
Quote:
Perhaps if you could, moreover, provide more information about what your essay is attempting to do, someone could frame an answer that would be helpful. I take it that your essay somehow wants to follow the Hegelian concept as it was seen and used by later philosophers, and perhaps draw some conclusion about philosophical terminology from that example.
@wotanstod: I think the concept of "the mind" in phenomonology is simply consciousness, or are you asking something else? I'm no help as for Collingwood as I've not read anything from him but it seems to me his idea, "the subject-matter of history is mind" pretty broadly describes phenomonology's understanding of itself in that consciousness is merely "history" (long past or recent) or events that the mind is aware of or concentrated on in a given moment. I'm not sure if this is right though...
0 Replies
 
NoOne phil
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Oct, 2010 02:44 pm
@wotanstod,
It means that our colleges are producing idiots.
if we learn by experience, i.e. perception determines conception, conception determines will, then one cannot have abstracted phenomenolgy from the mind "of". Self-Referential fallacy.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
  1. Forums
  2. » What is the meaning of the concept 'mind' in the 'Phenomenology of Mind'?
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 08/19/2022 at 04:37:05